Robert Schumann Vol. Ii
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
ROBERT SCHUMANN Complete Symphonic Works VOL. II HEINZ HOLLIGER WDR Sinfonieorchester Köln ROBERT SCHUMANN Complete Symphonic Works • Vol. II recording date: January 23-27, 2012 (Symphony No. 2) March 19-23, 2012 (Symphony No. 3) Symphony No. 2 in C major, Op. 61 36:10 I. Sostenuto assai – Allegro ma non troppo 12:01 P Eine Produktion des Westdeutschen Rundfunks Köln, 2012 II. Scherzo. Allegro vivace 7:03 lizenziert durch die WDR mediagroup GmbH III. Adagio espressivo 8:26 recording location: Köln, Philharmonie IV. Allegro molto vivace 8:40 executive producer (WDR): Siegwald Bütow recording producer & editing: Günther Wollersheim recording engineer: Brigitte Angerhausen Symphony No. 3 in E-flat major, Op. 97 ‘Rhenish’ 30:35 Recording assistant: Astrid Großmann I. Lebhaft 8:58 photos: Heinz Holliger (page 8): Julieta Schildknecht II. Scherzo. Sehr mäßig 5:40 WDR Sinfonieorchester Köln (page 5): WDR Thomas Kost III. Nicht schnell 5:08 WDR Sinfonieorchester Köln (page 9): Mischa Salevic IV. Feierlich 5:04 front illustration: ‘Sonnenuntergang (Brüder)’ Caspar David Friedrich V. Lebhaft 5:45 art direction and design: AB•Design executive producer (audite): Dipl.-Tonmeister Ludger Böckenhoff e-mail: [email protected] • http: //www.audite.de HEINZ HOLLIGER © 2014 Ludger Böckenhoff WDR Sinfonieorchester Köln Robert Schumann‘s instrumental sound – the sound towards The C-major Symphony not only sketched, but also developed. Symphonies which Brahms and Franck also strove” He also spent more time revising works, A peculiar contradiction has marked the (Jon W. Finson). He attained it, above all, If one were to count Schumann’s Sym- both during their preparatory stages and reception of Schumann’s symphonies. through careful orchestration in the mid- phonies according to their order of com- in the aftermath of performances. For Especially after their premieres, con- dle ranges. With larger string forces, how- position, then the two works in C major, instance, he revised the C-major Sym- temporary critics praised the masterly ever, the fine design and final crowning of Op. 61 and in E-flat major, Op. 97 would phony at least thrice prior to its publica- instrumentation of these works, above the sound in the winds become weaker; be the Fourth and Fifth. If we included the tion, changing not only the instrumenta- all in their writing for brass and wood- one easily gains the impression of the extensive sketch for a C-minor symphony tion in some spots, but also making cuts winds. During the decades following the relatively “thick” writing of which Schu- made in 1841 and ultimately shelved by in the first and final movements. composer’s death, however, orchestra- mann has been frequently accused. For the composer, they would be the Fifth The decisive impulse for the compo- tion was declared to be their primary their recordings, Heinz Holliger and the and Sixth. They are separated by four sition of the Second Symphony (accord- weakness – and this verdict has persisted WDR Symphony Orchestra have there- and nine years, respectively, from the ing to the customary reckoning), as with up until very recent times. Critics were fore chosen the orchestral size with which works of the “symphonic year” includ- the First, came from Schubert’s C-major quick to point out the reason: Schumann the composer himself rehearsed and per- ing the First Symphony in B-flat major, Symphony (“The Great”), which Schu- thought in terms of his own instrument, formed his works, thus restoring the sonic Op. 38, the Symphony in D minor that mann had heard again in 1845 as per- the piano, not in terms of the possibilities balance that he originally intended. Before was counted as the Fourth and received formed by the Gewandhausorchester of the orchestra. How could this change the backdrop of the above remarks, opus number 120 after its revision, and under Hiller’s direction. Contemporar- in aesthetical verdict come about? Jon Gustav Mahler’s revisions of Schumann’s the Overture, Scherzo and Finale, Op. 52. ies, however, primarily placed it in a line W. Finson has called our attention to instrumentation do not merely appear Altered methods of production came of development with Beethoven’s Ninth. the fact that Schumann, in contrast to as interpretative adaptations, but also as with the composer’s new creative phase. They believed that its course of ideas – present-day compositional practice, had attempts to rectify the imbalances that Schumann had formerly written down one could speak of a “plot” in the sense relatively small orchestras at his disposal; have arisen for the modern orchestra. works, even large ones, all at once within of a novel – led, as in Beethoven’s work, the body of strings, in particular, was sig- They aim to show the ideas behind Schu- a relatively short time. He now took from depression to triumph, from the nificantly smaller. Through his orchestra- mann’s works to their best advantage, more time to work out the character gloomy catacombs of (spiritual) life into tion, he was able to help small ensembles once again, under altered historical condi- and arrangement of the whole, consider- bright regions of existence. “The strug- achieve “a more solid, almost massive tions of performance practice. ing various alternatives that were often gle of the individual subject, crowned by victory after the most complete pene- the movement’s five parts according to by three observations: the unfinished, even went so far as to extol the finale as tration into and absolute merging with the scheme A–B–A–C–A; its character shelved C-minor Symphony, sketched an historical achievement that surpassed loving, spiritual universality, is also the is like that of a silhouette of a roman- alongside the corrections made to the Beethoven: “Ludwig couldn’t yet manage idea of the Ninth Symphony”, as Ernst tic chorale. The third, slow movement Symphony B-flat major, very clearly took it just with instruments, he had to bor- Gottschald wrote in the Neue Zeitschrift is composed in the manner of Bach; at up where the last Viennese classicist row the word from the art of poetry; für Musik, the journal that Schumann had times, the composer points out the rela- left off. The fact that Schumann neither Robert achieves it for the first time with earlier founded. tionship between his work and the Trio finished it nor considered publication nothing but instruments.” In both works, The explicit and implicit references Sonata from the Musical Offering and to and performance was due to the work’s the finale serves “as a triumphant conclu- to Johann Sebastian Bach appear no less the Erbarme dich aria from the St. Matthew overly-restrictive stylistic proximity to sion, quoting passages from the preced- significant when viewed from a present- Passion. Only a loose connection can be Beethoven; this pushed his own individu- ing movements and extensively varying day historical vantage point. Schumann established in both directions, however; ality into the background. In addition, the a cantabile melody. With this,” in the creates them on various levels and with the relationship primarily exists on the arrangement of characters of the Second words of Jon W. Finson, “the parallels differing degrees of clarity. They remain level of musical language, in the repre- Symphony’s movements is reminiscent of between Schumann’s Second Symphony rather hidden in the first movement, sentation of a romantic interpretation of Beethoven; as in the latter composer’s and Beethoven’s Ninth are, of course, appearing more or less in a mediation of Bach and at dramaturgically decisive spots Ninth, the scherzo is the second move- exhausted.” the second degree. The principal theme in the gesture of an historical, retrospec- ment, energetically continuing the insist- Gottschald’s verdict – both his enthusi- of the fast part resembles the begin- tive view. The various more-or-less hid- ent motion from the first movement in asm and his conception of categories – is ning of the Second Fugue on the Name den Bach references, however, hint at a its recurring main section, intensifying it a product of his time. Two decades after BACH in its rhythmically accentuated compositional awareness in which the and creating, in the trios, forces which his death, Beethoven was considered the opening figure; like the other five pieces musical past is constantly present; this clearly oppose it. The slow movement measure of all things musical, through- of his Op. 60, Schumann composed it presence expresses itself in various forms is allocated a significant role in its posi- out all of Europe. Not to be measured immediately prior to the Symphony. In in the specific work at hand. tion preceding the finale; in the logic of according to him was tantamount to dis- the second movement, the scherzo, he Albeit in a different way, these remarks drama, it would represent the peripeteia, qualification. Schumann’s opinion that the makes a secret of the sequence B-A-C-H also apply to Schumann’s relationship the place at which the ensuing course emergence of Schubert’s Great Symphony in the second trio which assumes the to Beethoven. His intensive confronta- of events is decided. In his article about had prepared the way for symphonic penultimate position in the order of tion with that composer is confirmed Schumann’s Op. 61, Ernst Gottschald music after Beethoven, and opened up new horizons, had not yet gained wide historical standard of excellence than as Schumann recalls motifs from the first cycle An die ferne Geliebte (To the Distant acceptance. Today, in light of our over- a direct model. movement, the music breaks down and Beloved) and bears the text: “Nimm sie view of music history, Schumann’s rela- This appears to be contradicted by retreats, as if it wanted to bow out in a hin denn diese Lieder” (Accept them, tionship to the two Viennese masters the third and clearest reference to Bee- demonstratively unsymphonic manner.